Hacker News new | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit login
10 graphic examples of the abomination that is iTunes on Windows (troyhunt.com)
72 points by troyhunt 1689 days ago | hide | past | web | 85 comments | favorite



Or how about: anything I do in iTunes makes it freeze for five seconds.

It's been explained to me that this is because my music collection is around 200GB, so my iTunes Library.xml file is around 60MB, and any action (playing a song, renaming, etc.) rewrites the entire XML file on disk (incrementing play count, renaming, etc.).

And this is on a MacBook Air with SSD under Lion!


Whose idea was it to use an XML file for a non-human-readable library file? SQLite would sing in this use case.


There's a regular (possibly SQLite-based) database format as well. The XML file is the backup.


Yep, this is extremely annoying. For an application that is supposed to catalog my library of media, it's quite inefficient with a large number of items. Without knowing what the possible solutions to this are, all I can say is that there needs to be a distinction between collections of media which are expected to be more reasonable in size (say an album, or one artist's catalog) and libraries which may grow to be quite huge. I have terabytes on external HDs that I won't let iTunes touch for a variety of reasons, leaving it pretty much no function other than to push things to the iPod or AppleTV.


I have to call shenanigans on this one.

My music library is about 100GB and accordingly, my iTunes library XML is 31.2MB. My system operates on an SSD, but the entire iTunes DB is located on an internal 2TB hard drive, it's my slow one too.

Never experienced this or anything close to this. It could be a bug related to libraries around 200GB or an XML file of over 60MB or something, but it's not directly because of the fact that iTunes re-writes the XML file when you make any change.

That does happen, but it shouldn't lock up iTunes unless there is something wrong with your computer. Why? Because iTunes doesn't even use that XML file. It only exists to give 3rd party apps direct access to the iTunes library info. I can jump through my 20,700 song library, with the iTunes folder open watching it rewrite that XML file every time I do anything. No machine slowdown to speak of, on both a Mac Pro and an 11 inch MacBook Air where the library is in the same location as the system.

I think there is something wrong with your machine. This would drive me absolutely insane, and I use iTunes every single day for hours a day, almost without exception.


Since it is on a Air with a SSD I assume your library is on a external drive.

Mine does the same since it is on a external USB HDD. On a internal SATA drive it is instant.


My music files themselves are on a network drive, but I keep the library files themselves on my SSD (as is recommended).

So for file renames I understand, but not for playcounts or playlist changes or anything like that -- because those should access my SSD only, and not touch the external drive.


My friends swear I'm an idiot, despite having written my own music library software because I couldn't stand the others, but I've had the same problem with iTunes being slow as shit. My initial import takes thousands of times the time it takes for other software to do the same thing and it has a nasty habit of "forgetting" where your library is if you don't leave it at the default.

I love it, I just reloaded OS X and it keeps trying to start iTunes. Everytime I just deny the TOS and it slinks away. Good riddance.


Techies that find iTunes so frustrating do amuse me. My iTunes library has been located in a non-default location since the original iTunes for OS 9.

External drives, network locations, internal secondary drives, over the years my needs and requirements have changed. iTunes has worked in all those locations. My current library has a creation date of 2009.

Initial import does take quite some time. Good thing I haven't had to do it since... well 2009 I guess.

iTunes isn't the black box people make it out to be. iOS device management through iTunes is, I'm not even going to touch that one. However the regular library functions of iTunes are quite simple and keeping a library from being destroyed isn't difficult.

> Good riddance.

Still the best library based jukebox for OS X. I'm willing to put it up against any other option.


I've never had freezing/crashing/apocalyptic issues with iTunes on Win or OSX, but for a company that prides itself on user experience, iTunes leaves a lot to be desired. I pine for the day when a real Winamp gets on OSX, and not in that half assed form they came out with a few months ago. But maybe thats just cuz I'm old and set in my ways. Or maybe I just like a simple way to queue up some songs, or the ability to see 50 songs in my playlist, while only taking up a narrow side of my screen. But that's just the retro grouch in me...

Your right as far as I know on your last point, not that I've done much searching, but I can hope there's something out there someday.


Yes, many people have no problems with iTunes. However I find it amusing that people think the large population of the rest of us to be 'crazy' or some such because we all seem to experience the same problems and can reproduce them very easily.

Itunes is the very definition of a black box. If you have an even slightly large library, it becomes a slow behemoth writing it's awkward binary-xml-shit files every time a change is made.

And no offense, you did not move your library across all those spots without issue. It's frankly not possible. Moving those files causes iTunes to lose it's absolute references to them and you have to do a reimport.


It's possible to get iTunes to change its idea of where the music files are. I've done a similar amount of iTunes library moving, and it's been quite amazingly reliable through all that upheaval.

A combination of consolidating and setting the default media location and re-consolidating and holding option on launch etc will eventually get it to find all its media.


shinratdr has fanboy confirmation bias. You'll get nowhere with them.


Fuck off if you have nothing to add to the discussion except BS, thanks.


> However I find it amusing that people think the large population of the rest of us to be 'crazy' or some such because we all seem to experience the same problems and can reproduce them very easily.

That's not the reason. It's because you choose to bitch about them instead of attempting to solve them, even though they are completely solvable problems that don't happen in a clean setup. Reproducing means nothing, except that you didn't bother to try and solve the problem.

> If you have an even slightly large library, it becomes a slow behemoth writing it's awkward binary-xml-shit files every time a change is made.

This is just patently false. See my other comment for a detailed explanation. Long and short of it is iTunes doesn't even use the XML file, it exists for 3rd party apps to use. If your machine locks up every time a 30MB file is written (written, not even accessed) then there is something wrong with your storage media, not iTunes.

Perhaps you have some sort of 3rd party syncing app that immediately accesses the iTunes XML every time it is re-written? That's more likely than Apple not noticing that their media player locks up every time when accessing a large library.

> And no offense, you did not move your library across all those spots without issue.

Hard to take offence to something I didn't say. My iTunes library has existed on all of those locations at one time or another, it wasn't the same library every time. Like I said, last time I recreated it was in 2009. It still existed in those locations and didn't randomly reset itself as you claim.

> It's frankly not possible. Moving those files causes iTunes to lose it's absolute references to them and you have to do a reimport.

Oh no! Exclamation marks everywhere! Click the song, browse to the song, iTunes asks if you want to check the folder for any other references. 5 minute scan later, all pointers are fixed. It's not only possible, it's dead simple.

It's almost like you could have discovered that with a simple Google search. Or hell, just actually trying instead of jumping immediately to whining.


> Long and short of it is iTunes doesn't even use the XML file, it exists for 3rd party apps to use. If your machine locks up every time a 30MB file is written (written, not even accessed) then there is something wrong with your storage media, not iTunes.

It doesn't matter that iTunes doesn't read the XML file. Any machine will take at least a couple seconds to write out an entire 30MB file. And if it does this every single time you update a playcount or rename a playlist, and blocks your user interface during this, then there's a fundamental flaw with the software.


> It doesn't matter that iTunes doesn't read the XML file.

Yes, it does.

> Any machine will take at least a couple seconds to write out an entire 30MB file.

True, but if it's locking up iTunes every time that occurs then THERE IS SOMETHING WRONG WITH YOUR MACHINE OR SETUP. End of story.

> And if it does this every single time you update a playcount or rename a playlist, and blocks your user interface during this, then there's a fundamental flaw with the software.

No doubt. Since that doesn't actually happen, there isn't such a fundamental flaw.


Again, I love the fact that you, just like the people I talked about in my first fucking comment, treat me like I'm stupid, despite the fact that I know what I'm doing (hell, enough to reproduce 90% of iTunes's features in my own media library/player). You even imply that I run to whinning instead of Googling. Why don't you Google these issues. You'll find dozens of other people with the exact same issue.

You wasted a lot of effort typing that reply. One of my more infuriating replies I've gotten here.

edit: Annnnnd a quick look at your other comments in this thread tell me everything I need to know. You're even running around telling other people describing the exact same problem and acting like they're crazy. You realize that something working for you doesn't mean it's bug free, right?

My media library takes an arbitrary number of sources, takes 2 minutes to parse my library, works with more file formats, doesn't store an incomprehensible, incompatible format that no one else can write, doesn't require inane Terms of Service and more. I'm very, very happy that iTunes works for you. For a ton of people, it's a damn headache.


> Again, I love the fact that you, just like the people I talked about in my first fucking comment, treat me like I'm stupid, despite the fact that I know what I'm doing

I treat you like you're stupid because you present stupid little issues as insurmountable problems.

> (hell, enough to reproduce 90% of iTunes's features in my own media library/player)

Programmers IMO are some of the worst for jumping to "I can do this better!" instead of again attempting to solve the problem.

> You even imply that I run to whinning instead of Googling. Why don't you Google these issues. You'll find dozens of other people with the exact same issue.

I don't imply it, I say it. Because you do.

Also, Google offers the EXACT same solution: Clean up your machine because if it can't write a 30mb file that isn't even being read without locking up, there is something wrong with it.

> You wasted a lot of effort typing that reply.

Personally I think it was used perfectly.

> One of my more infuriating replies I've gotten here.

Yeah, being challenged on your BS can be frustrating. I'm glad I could be a part of that.

> Annnnnd a quick look at your other comments in this thread tell me everything I need to know. You're even running around telling other people describing the exact same problem and acting like they're crazy.

You call it crazy, I call it lazy. Whatever, it's still bitching over fixing. I'm not calling them crazy for having the problem, I'm calling them lazy for having the problem for so long and just bitching about it instead of doing something about it.

> You realize that something working for you doesn't mean it's bug free, right?

Of course, just because something isn't working on a particular setup doesn't mean its bug-ridden either.


>I don't imply it, I say it. Because you do.

>Why don't you Google these issues. You'll find dozens of other people with the exact same issue.

You're a stupid little fuck, aren't you. I DID Google them instead of whining first. You really think I sunk probably a hundred hours into writing something purely from scratch before Googling. Good god how can you breath with your head that far up Apple's ass?

>Of course, just because something isn't working on a particular setup doesn't mean its bug-ridden either.

And we've always been at war with Oceania.


LOL, Hey I'm not the one who insists he is a programmer and yet can't solve the missing items issue in iTunes.

You can hire this stupid little fuck for $100/hr, I'll solve all your impossible iTunes problems. If you're really that retarded, I'm sure it will be money well spent.

> Good god how can you breath with your head that far up Apple's ass?

...You presented the problem, idiot. I'm not just guessing as to what your issue was. You presented the simplest iTunes problem in the world to solve, and then acted like it was sufficient motivation to write a competitor.

Head up Apple's ass? I'm not the one so blinded by marketing I expect it to immediately work without issue. It's still software. The only one with unrealistic expectations of iTunes is you, namely that it should function perfectly on a machine that can't write 30mb without locking up.

> And we've always been at war with Oceania.

Give a break. Here: Send me your music player, $20 says I can get it to crash on launch.


You're a real piece of work. Do you understand the definition of confirmation bias? Does the likely over a dozen point difference in our comment scores on your our posts here not give you any indication that this just might not be an isolated issue? Or are you one of these people that is never wrong and can't admit that you might not have experienced every possible use case or code path of iTunes?

Seriously, do you understand the absurdity of what you're claiming, outside of this application or your or I's anecdotes... that the claim that the software is bug free or works perfectly for everyone is just an outlandishly stupid thing to claim as an absolute?

>Give a break. Here: Send me your music player, $20 says I can get it to crash on launch.

Soon enough, I'm preparing to release it by the end of May. I'm not really sure how you plan on crashing it given it's design, but it's cute that you continue to make absurd assumptions and personal attacks.


> Does the likely over a dozen point difference in our comment scores on your our posts here not give you any indication that this just might not be an isolated issue?

I can't see the point difference between our comments, how would I know that? Moreover, why should I care? Congrats, you've proven other techs also don't like things that confuse them and would prefer to join in your bitching.

> Or are you one of these people that is never wrong and can't admit that you might not have experienced every possible use case or code path of iTunes?

You're acting like I'm saying iTunes is perfect. It's not, it's riddled with issues and a frank conversation on it's future is important. I'm just saying the issues most techs present to me, including the one you did, are the simplest issues to solve and indicative of a weird attitude techs have towards iTunes, where they assume it will fuck them over before trying anything to solve the problem.

If you had presented a real issue, I wouldn't have even continued. You instead presented the simplest one that only happens to novice users, so I laid into you appropriately.

> Seriously, do you understand the absurdity of what you're claiming, outside of this application or your or I's anecdotes... that the claim that the software is bug free or works perfectly for everyone is just an outlandishly stupid thing to claim as an absolute?

That is a ridiculous claim. Good thing I never once said that.

> but it's cute that you continue to make absurd assumptions and personal attacks.

My point was that any software on a machine with sufficient issues can crash. That wasn't an "absurd assumption or personal attack" it was verifiable truth.


>Techies that find iTunes so frustrating do amuse me.

Probably outliers with music libraries in the multi TB range


That's what I would have expected, but OP says his library is 200GB hence why I made the argument. My library is 115GB and doesn't come close to experiencing these issues, and it's accessed from seven different Macs, all with different hardware, software and of different generations.


I've always marveled at Apple. They have top notch Engineers working their hardware. They have fantastic Designers.

But for some reason. Apple can't get a decent programmer. Their software sucks. Plain down right sucks. I love using apple hardware but I can't stand any software made by them. (See: Xcode, Itunes, Safari)


I'll take a wild guess. The reason can be Objective C. The language and its framework is fully dynamic. Your program can compile, but without extensive testing you won't know if it works. Checks that statically typed languages do at compile time have to be done by runtime tests in dynamic languages such as Objective C. And Apple doesn't have the ability to do enough testing for their products to ensure every single feature is bug free.


I guess they send all the talented one to the operating system division


OS X is infamous for its bugs. See for example: http://pod.tst.eu/http://cvs.schmorp.de/libev/ev.pod#OS_X_AN...


I don't see anything "infamous" here. I see a page with some bugs that affect a specific library. It then goes on to mention bugs for other OSes that affect the same library.


>But for some reason. Apple can't get a decent programmer. Their software sucks. Plain down right sucks. I love using apple hardware but I can't stand any software made by them. (See: Xcode, Itunes, Safari)

If you prefer Emacs/Vim, OK, but I can't see a much better tool than XCode for Objective-C (and arguably C/C++), plus UI building. Version 4 is buggy and crashes, but then again it's a mostly complete rewrite of the old XCode codebase. 4.3 is stabler than previous 4.x releases --it will get better.

As for iTunes, I can't see any problem with it, besides handling a lot of different functionality in one app. Do you see many actual bugs in day to day use? Because using it for almost 10 years, I don't remember any.

Safari, yes, tend to do some stupid things. Though, Chrome, to which I migrated is also based on Apple code for the core engine.

Plus: the OS, Logic, Aperture, Pages, Keynote, all top notch apps.


> is also based on Apple code for the core engine.

Apple Safari uses WebKit - a free open source web browser engine. It's not Apple's code, it existed way before Apple got into browser business.


>Apple Safari uses WebKit - a free open source web browser engine. It's not Apple's code, it existed way before Apple got into browser business.

I used Konqueror long before Apple made Safari, so I am aware of the history. It's hardly the whole story though.

Safari uses Webkit, but Apple made Webkit. Webkit did not exist before Apple got into the browsing business. What did exist was khtml made by the KDE project.

That engine was a nice stable base that Apple used to build Webkit upon but it was lightyears behind the Webkit we know. Apple put TONS of work into Webkit and made it into one of the rendering engines that it is today, long before even Google got involved.

Most of Webkit buy the time was Apple's code, including tons of bugfixes, huge performance improvements, all the HTML5 support (heck Canvas is Apple's invention, before it become a standard), css tranformations and animation, and the all-important Javascript engine, which was the first Javascript engine to kick of the speedy javascript JIT race (Firefox followed suit and then come V8).


I have seen many of the bugs in the article.


<conspiracy theory>

Apple is intentionally keeping iTunes on Windows a "sub-par" experience to attract more users to move over to MacOS. I think the majority of non-power don't understand the problem is with iTunes specifically, and would say something like "The whole damn computer sucks".

</conspiracy>


The biggest problem with this theory is that iTunes is hardly an enjoyable experience on OSX either!


It's only the comments in this thread that have made me realise iTunes is infuriating for everyone.

Having never been an Mac OS user, I had always assumed they put all their effort into the Mac version, and then did some kind of nasty port and hacked away until a windows version worked. Not a conspiracy theory, so much as a lack of interest from Apple to make a decent windows version.

On windows, I use winamp. It supports my iPod, and actually allows me to listen to and manage my music collection.


+1 million for using winamp. By far the thing I miss most from windows. (I'm OSX and Linux all the way these days, but there are things I miss.)


I think the conspiracy runs deeper .... they've made iTunes so specifically bad on OS X they're trying to drive users to linux where there is no iTunes at all!


Where you can use Amarok and realise what you were missing!

Edit: It's been a while since I followed Amarok developments, turns out it's now available multi platform... Starts download on all machines...


0 errors 1 warning: unknown attribute 'theory' in tag 'conspiracy'

I actually think I've heard this one before, especially when the software was just being released on Windows...


Another one for the collection: iTunes starts randomly. While doing some work, it suddenly starts up and shows in my screen. With no reason. There's no iPhone in my house. I didn't configure an iPhone with wireless sync with iTunes, and my WiFi is secured (nobody else than me accesed through it). And it still starts randomly, since the update that came with iOS5.


Here is another example. Every time iTunes needs an update it brings up an automatic updater. Fair enough. I click on update, and the iTunes updater downloads the new version and every single time fails to install it with some generic unhelpful error. Then I have to go and manually download the new version from the website and manually install the new version.

And every time a new update comes, I click "update" on the automatic updater hoping that this time they fixed it, but no such luck.

I was so happy when iOS started updating without a computer.


To be fair, it's pretty horrid on OS X as well - several of these issues apply cross-platform (iTunes WiFi sync error messages are presented to me on a daily basis running Lion, for example.)


Examples 2, 3, and 7 are common for me on OSX. I just hate syncing my device.

Some of the other problems I've been having: iTunes gives me an alert saying some tracks can not be synced and so the sync process hangs until I close the prompt or manually stop the sync on my iPhone. If I remove a large app on my phone (example: the 1Gb Max Payne game) and then attempt to sync the phone after, iTunes decides to install the app again which means a lengthy transfer of a 1Gb file. If I make a change to my playlist on the phone and sync, two versions of the playlist are created (not always reproducible).

iTunes is a horrible horrible experience on either OS. I've given up using it as a music player, in favor of Ecoute[1]. Pity I still need it for my iPhone.

[1] http://www.pixiapps.com/ecoute/


I actually find the iTunes store on the iPhone to be quite terrible as well.

It takes longer than any other app to power up and then greets you with a "Loading..." routine. In case you get over this it will do it again every time you switch to a different item on the menu, e.g. Search. It's like it's not sure of itself and must phone home before displaying the UI to, I don't know, show a user the "Purchased" screen. Same deal with the App Store and Mail apps. All very clunky.


Indeed!

It wouldn't be too much to ask to cache what has been loaded WHILE the app is running, is it? Or even maybe keep it cached w/o the pictures. Hell, they could maybe poll 50 entries instead of 25 and cache it with no problem (excluding graphics).

While I am at this, WHY does mobile safari have to reload a page every time i switch tabs/press the home button and instantly power it up again? It's not only hugely annoying on a non 3g device, it also makes no sense, you should at least be able to set an interval/turn it off...


At least on windows you have alternatives...

I'm still looking for a viable replacement on OSX.

Actually scratch that. More urgently I'm seeking a Finder-replacement that doesn't lock up for seconds at a time all the time. In 2012. On a 2 GHz computer. With a SSD. Truly magical!


Check out Path Finder - http://cocoatech.com/pathfinder/. I've been using for a while, it's light years beyond Finder. You can't completely kill Finder, OS X won't allow it but Path Finder makes it a lot better.


If that's a third-party SSD, it's probably a hardware problem.

You can generate a sysdiagnose report which will contain too much information by pressing ctrl-opt-cmd-shift-. when experiencing a problem. The spindump file inside it is quite readable to a systems programmer and may be helpful.


Why does it never occur to you people that your machine might have a problem? The Finder constantly locking up is not normal behaviour, no more than Windows Explorer locking up is normal behaviour. Why would you even think otherwise?

Seriously, is this HN or YouTube? It's just ridiculous how whiny techs get when it comes to iTunes, OS X and iOS. I can solve an endless stream of technical problems all day with varying requirements and urgency, but syncing my iPhone is such a mystery!

Give me a break. Here: Create a new partition on your drive, install a fresh copy of OS X. Does the Finder still lock up? No? What a surprise. OS X is a preferable OS for some people. It's not going to hold your hand and wipe your ass for you FFS, you still need to put in the slightest bit of effort.


The one I love is when I create a playlist, verify it has songs in it (on iTunes), sync my iPod and the playlist is empty. Completely empty.

Then the duplicate playlists that appear out of nowhere for whatever reason. But they're only duplicated on the device.

Then there's the need to use a third-party hack to detect and remove dead tracks, or add new ones when I'm not purchasing musing from iTunes. As far as Apple is concerned, I must purchase my music from them, not from Amazon. So something so mundane as a folder watch isn't needed.

It's unfortunate that we love the devices but have no choice but to put up with the horrid crap that is the software.


If you use Windows, Apple secretly hates you.


To be fair, MS Office on Mac has a tendency to fail in extremely frustrating ways too... (Seriously, section references, picture captions/references, toc, all just stop working at a certain document size, if at all, not to mention the freeze at a 100pp thing).


But that is not really fair is it. Apple is not supposed to have good Windows software to do Microsoft a favor. They should have good Windows software to do themselves a favor. Because people will be more likely to use their devices. And if the Windows software is excellent, Windows users will consider an Apple for their next computer.

Now a Windows user hears about all the hoopla about how great Apple interfaces are, looks at iTunes and says "that cannot be true".


My point was more that a company that makes an operating system probably puts it's best devs on the software for that OS. Further, there is probably not a lot of institutional knowledge of the other supported os. Lastly, there is probably some difficulty in getting good applicants with ".Net guys, come work at Apple", or "Objective-C dev? MS is hiring!". It reads like "come work for the enemy".


I know that maybe you do work that is impossible to do in other suite than Office, but, did you try LaTeX?

It manages all the references incredibly good, picture captions, TOC... it requires more work than Office, but I think is more rewarding.


Yeah, good luck getting LaTeX to be accepted for interdepartmental correspondence, let alone inter-company.

Also, Word can track revision history on each document. What's the equivalent for LaTeX? A git repo?

The upshot of network effects is that if you work for anybody but yourself, a Windows PC with a moderately recent Microsoft Office is a requirement.


If the correspondence does not need to be editable, PDF is the best option, with even less problems than Word or OpenOffice formats. And LaTeX has built-in support for it.

I agree with revision history, Word probably manages it pretty good. But git repos aren't a bad option if you are used to them. I personally use Dropbox, so I have a simple revision history without problems.

Anyways, I didn't say LaTeX was the perfect solution, that's why I said that he maybe had some impediment to use it instead of Office.


Well, maybe in whatever line of work you've chosen, or just whatever big company you've decided to work for, but it's never been a requirement for me.


We regularly use LaTeX when it is internal to our group, but a lot of our partners won't use anything but word. Fortunately it is only a small number of documents that reach the limits with them, but unfortunately they take a disproportionate amount of the joint effort :/.

For internal stuff, and papers where our group has sole authorship (and some enlightened partners) we have a very nice set of scripts for auto-generating git repos with all the latex styles and generic skeletons for us.


I think LaTeX is built for perfectionist, pedantic academics. That is not to say I don't secretly love it, but after spending hours battling the program trying to get it to look right, I usually end up asking myself what's the point?


That sounds like a LaTeX koan. If you really must use LaTeX, eventually you reach the state of just writing the content and to heck with the formatting, or you go nuts and learn to write a proper style file. You are pretty certain not to volunteer to write up the department newsletter with lots of pictures from the spring picnic.


Not so secretly apparently.


Or the lack of the most basic elements of a media library: folder watching. No, I don't want one folder, I want to watch any folder. Seriously, how fucking complicated is that to implement?


Do you mean just to add media/quickview playlists, or to index the entire library? (assuming the latter)

Given the default behavior of organizing all of your media within the iTunes directory, it makes perfect sense and would be a great feature. I'm sure there are other people more qualified to comment, but my first impression of the problem is that without some clever implementation there would be some major speed issues with large libraries.


By folder watching, I mean: when I put a multimedia file in in a folder (which I've assigned to be 'watched'), iTunes updates the library. I'm very certain Windows has APIs for exactly this kind of situation. In fact, if they can do it for one folder, I'm having trouble seeing a reason why they wouldn't be able to do it for several folders.


You can do this with Applescript as a folder action. You can see how to do this here: http://dougscripts.com/itunes/itinfo/folderaction01.php

I was thinking that you meant live monitoring, i.e. your library would be a reflection of your directory structure with additional metadata stored in unit sections so that it scales better.


It's nice the Applescript exists (although I was talking more about Windows) but again, it's very sad one has to use an Applescript to accomplish this, on Mac.

I mean, a solution is out there: very good. Nevertheless, it doesn't justify or excuse iTunes for not having this feature.


There's an "Automatically Add to iTunes" folder that'll do that, but it's still annoying to have to use one special folder instead of just pointing it at my regular download folder. I always forget that Apple added this. More here: http://lifehacker.com/5356619/itunes-finally-adds-watched-fo...


Which is why I have been using MediaMonkey as much as I can with my iPhone, iPad, and iPod. I hate when I am forced to use iTunes for an upgrade. It is like going to the dentist.


6. Reboot? But I don’t want to reboot!

I never understood why it has to have a system reboot either, and I'm on a Mac. I don't like rebooting, I just like to let my Mac sleep!


Well, they are probably replacing a file which is currently in use on which other files depend on. While there may be other solutions to that problem, rebooting is the least error prone one and people are already used to having to reboot their computer after updates.


That's a shitty excuse to reboot; sounds more like they didn't want to bother. If you do your job properly, errors can be handled. If you do your job properly, errors aren't simply hex values.

Maybe people were used to reboot their computers 7 years ago but these days, you can entirely work and reboot only for system patches.


Yes, you are obviously right. They obviously didn't want to put up with error handling, as you can tell by the crappy error messages they implemented. Basically, they said "fck it, just reboot".


Anyone who uses Windows 7 is definitely not used to having to reboot their computer all the time. Most updates don't need a reboot. Heck, it's even possible to install the entire MS Office Suite and even some Visual Studio components without rebooting.

But maybe Apple uses a toolkit that is supposed to be compatible with older versions of Windows as well. In that case, just reboot that dinosaur.


I haven't used iTunes for quite a while, but my gripe (on Windows at the time) was that it decided what your content was, presumably by file extension. "Please class these files as TV episodes, for my iPod Video, iTunes", to which iTunes would say "sorry, those are movies", and move them into the movie folder... never found out how to stop it from doing that.


The seemingly easiest UI concept is the most annoying. "Apply" != "Save and Immediately Sync".

Why is there no way to simply change my settings without syncing??

Another annoying "feature" - iTunes handles syncing everything BUT pictures. Why?? Why do I need to open Windows to drag/drop the files in a folder?


I don't even like iTunes on OSX.


People would be surprised at the size of the team that produces the iTunes client.


3 squirrels and 1 microbe?


1?


I guess I'm the only one that doesn't have any problems with iTunes on windows, eh?


Came to say something like this. I know that iTunes is everyone's favorite whipping boy, but with a 10,000 song library on a 5200RPM drive that's at least 6 years old.. I don't seem to be having all of these issues that everyone else does with the Windows iTunes.

The worst problem I've had is error codes when trying to wifi sync, and that was solved by just disabling and reenabling the feature.


I think that several of these problems more or less just apply to windows programs in general. Its no excuse, but just something to keep in mind. Microsoft loves its cryptic error codes too.




Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | DMCA | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: